http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48086
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48086
Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||steven at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48086
--- Comment #9 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-13 10:07:50
UTC ---
my +1 generally to comment #8,
We are (re)-discussing with the Apple developer for ld (obviously that can't be
in this forum).
IMO, 'as' is trying to check if
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48101
Summary: obscure error message with std::setconst int
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45273
Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||steven at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48102
Summary: [4.6 Regression] Bootstrap failure for
powerpc-apple-darwin9: error: macro build_cloog_prog
requires 4 arguments, but only 3 given
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41894
Georg-Johann Lay avr at gjlay dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||avr at gjlay dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48094
--- Comment #4 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-13 12:13:05
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
(a) the first is because LTO has produced two image_info instances with
different mangled names ...
e.g. L_OBJC_ImageInfo.2044
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48102
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2011-03-13
12:23:47 UTC ---
I am now at stage 2 with the following patch:
--- ../_gcc_clean/gcc/graphite-cloog-compat.h2010-10-01 14:21:41.0
+0200+++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48101
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-13
12:24:13 UTC ---
Do you have a suggestion for a better error? We could use a static_assert in
std::allocator to reject const T
As far as I can see, the reason the code is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45273
Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #23643|0 |1
is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26458
--- Comment #12 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-03-13
13:11:38 UTC ---
Ian, I see you are returning to this old issue. Really, today I don't have a
strong opinion, if you are willing to post to the mailing list a patchlet
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46896
--- Comment #16 from Paul Thomas pault at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-13 14:16:25
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #15)
Tobias,
You shame me - I undertook to do something with this one and did not.
I do not know that the fix is compatible even with
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48103
Summary: Lambda function incorrect syntax leads to internal
compiler error and segfault
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35913
Paul Thomas pault at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48103
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39988
Paul Thomas pault at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48090
Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rearnsha at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41023
Paul Thomas pault at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41083
Paul Thomas pault at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41107
Paul Thomas pault at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48104
Summary: aa
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41603
Paul Thomas pault at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48104
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41650
Paul Thomas pault at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40838
--- Comment #87 from Dzianis Kahanovich mahatma at eu dot by 2011-03-13
16:56:05 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #85)
Am I the only one who thinks this bug should be nominated as the first
priority
GCC 4.6.0 bug?
Some lazy people ;) may use
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47348
--- Comment #10 from Paul Thomas pault at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-13 17:37:47
UTC ---
Author: pault
Date: Sun Mar 13 17:37:43 2011
New Revision: 170923
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170923
Log:
2011-03-13 Paul Thomas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47348
Paul Thomas pault at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48102
Joseph S. Myers jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc-apple-darwin9 |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48102
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48102
Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48102
Joseph S. Myers jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48090
Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kazu at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48086
--- Comment #10 from Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-13
19:48:41 UTC ---
The easiest way to fix this is maybe to just have more than one GNU_LTO
segment. AFAIU the limit of 255 sections is a limit per segment. It is not
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48086
--- Comment #11 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-13 20:19:31
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
The easiest way to fix this is maybe to just have more than one GNU_LTO
segment. AFAIU the limit of 255 sections is a limit per
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48086
--- Comment #12 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-13 20:32:56
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
(In reply to comment #10)
The easiest way to fix this is maybe to just have more than one GNU_LTO
segment. AFAIU the limit of 255
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48090
--- Comment #9 from arnaud patard arnaud.pat...@rtp-net.org 2011-03-13
20:40:27 UTC ---
I confirm that backporting r159644 and r159683 make things work. From comment
8, I guess that the bug is still there and that one can still hit it sooner or
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48086
--- Comment #13 from Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-13
20:41:12 UTC ---
Alright, multiple segments will not work. Or even if they do, it is another
solution that may or may not work in the future depending on the whims of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48086
--- Comment #14 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-13 20:54:03
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
Alright, multiple segments will not work. Or even if they do, it is another
solution that may or may not work in the future
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48066
--- Comment #13 from Thomas Koenig tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-13
20:57:53 UTC ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Mar 13 20:57:49 2011
New Revision: 170924
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170924
Log:
2011-03-13 Thomas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48066
Thomas Koenig tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43700
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48106
Summary: [C++0x] ICE with scoped enum with fixed underlying
type
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.6
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48086
--- Comment #15 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu 2011-03-13
21:54:17 UTC ---
FYI, it it comes down to having a dependency on libelf or heavily lobbying
Apple to fix the broke change made to the assembler in Xcode 4.0.1 and 4.1, I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48107
Summary: [C++0x] no explicit conversion from scoped enumeration
type to bool
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.5
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48086
--- Comment #16 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu 2011-03-13
22:45:57 UTC ---
Actually the situation with Xcode 3.2.5 is pretty grim as well. Currently only
Xcode 3.2.2 is available for download from connect.apple.com. So people
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42566
--- Comment #12 from Ed Smith-Rowland 3dw4rd at verizon dot net 2011-03-14
02:18:20 UTC ---
I tried to test this but I can't get to it because now I'm stuck with a
bootstrap compare bug.
Actually, if the object file comparison happens after the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48086
--- Comment #17 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-14
02:47:53 UTC ---
Author: mrs
Date: Mon Mar 14 02:47:49 2011
New Revision: 170929
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170929
Log:
2011-03-13 Jack
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48086
m...@gcc.gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48086
--- Comment #19 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu 2011-03-14
02:57:50 UTC ---
Should I create a new PR for following the progress of the re-implementation of
LTO on darwin?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48108
Summary: lto should be containerized in a single mach-o section
on darwin
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48086
--- Comment #20 from Mike Stump mikestump at comcast dot net 2011-03-14
03:09:08 UTC ---
I'm ambivalent. If people developing or following would like one, feel free to
create one. Depending on how safe it is, we could put it in sooner, and by
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48108
--- Comment #1 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu 2011-03-14
03:10:24 UTC ---
Note that LTO was disabled for gcc 4.6.0 due to the inability of end-users to
obtain an appropriate Xcode 3.2.5 now that the broken Xcode 3.2.6/4.0 have
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48108
--- Comment #2 from Mike Stump mikestump at comcast dot net 2011-03-14
03:13:27 UTC ---
Another fix might be to have pure elf .o files... ld I think will read elf .o
files... [s] Don't tell anyone I said that. If not, we might be able to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48030
Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47125
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44909
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47200
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
58 matches
Mail list logo